Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Valin

CBO: Repealing Obamacare would boost economic growth

114 posts in this topic

2566634Washington Examiner:

Joseph Lawler

June 19, 2015

 

 

Repealing Obamacare would boost economic growth by an average of 0.7 percent after several years, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office released on Friday.

 

"CBO has determined what many in Congress have known all along," Republican Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi of Wyoming said in a statement. "This law acts as an anchor on our economy by dragging down employment and reducing labor force participation.

 

Repeal would make the economy grow faster in the budget office's projections mostly because of the removal provisions of the law that reduce the supply of labor.CBO estimated that repeal would not boost growth immediately. Then economic output would be boosted by 0.1 percent in 2017, rising to about 0.6 percent in 2020.

 

 

From 2021-2025, gross domestic product would be on average 0.7 percent greater. Based on the budget office's most recent economic projections, that amounts to between $100 billion and $200 billion in today's dollars.

 

That effect is mostly driven by the fact that with Obamacare in place, some people face incentives to work less because they might lose subsidies or credits if their earnings rise. Removing those incentives leads to more hours worked and more jobs. A smaller factor is that repealing some of Obamacare's taxes would cause businesses to invest and grow more.

 

(Snip)

 

 

 


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 More Reasons To Get Rid Of ObamaCare, Hidden In The CBO Report

 

Forecasts: ObamaCare advocates tout a new Congressional Budget Office report saying that ObamaCare's repeal would boost the deficit. But read the actual report. It tells a far different, more disturbing tale about this law.

 

The report found that repealing ObamaCare lock, stock and barrel would boost the deficit by $353 billion. That was enough for news outlets like CNN to report that repeal would "blow out the deficit."

 

Actually, given that the CBO expects deficits to total $7.2 trillion over those same years, the increase is more like a rounding error than a blowout.

 

But what the CBO's latest analysis does is provide three more reasons ObamaCare is a bad deal for the American public.

 

• It's bad for the economy. President Obama sold ObamaCare as a major boost to the economy. But the CBO says ObamaCare is hurting the economy and that its repeal would boost the nation's GDP by 0.7% from 2021 to 2025. Based on the CBO's own GDP forecasts, that translates into $886 billion. When you account for these economic effects, ObamaCare's impact on the deficit shrinks to just $137 billion.

 

• It relies on phony accounting. The only way the CBO can claim that ObamaCare would reduce the deficit by any amount is by assuming — as it must — that the roughly $800 billion in Medicare provider cuts all take effect. But that's a fantasy. The Medicare Board of Trustees says these payment cuts aren't realistic over the long term. And Obama just signed a law repealing Congress' last attempt to impose deep cuts to doctors.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/061915-758213-obamacare-repeal-would-add-886-billion-to-economy.htm

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the mixed-up files of Jonathan Gruber

Scott Johnson

June 22, 2015

 

You have to wonder if the Obama administration has ever uttered a true word about Obamacare. I say no.

 

President Obama has shifted the prevarications into overdrive in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s imminent decision on the IRS’s regulatory revision of the Obamacare law in King v. Burwell. On the issue before the Court in the case, we await a true word from the Obama administration, but we’re not holding our breath.

 

You may recall that when Jonathan Gruber distinguished himself as the man who dared to tell the truth about the law’s exploitation of the stupidity of the American voter and the mechanics of its design, President Obama and his minions went into “Gruber? Whodat???” mode (to borrow from John Updike). According to the White House, Gruber had essentially nothing to do with Obamacare.

 

Today’s Wall Street Journal carries the page-two story “MIT economist Jonathan Gruber had bigger role in health law, emails show” (accessible here via Google).

 

(Snip)

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

If Hillary is the Grand Mother of Obamacare, it appears Johnny is the father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If Hillary is the Grand Mother of Obamacare, it appears Johnny is the father."


For Heavens sake @Valin - spare me that imageohmy.png tongue.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"If Hillary is the Grand Mother of Obamacare, it appears Johnny is the father."
For Heavens sake @Valin - spare me that imageohmy.png tongue.png

 

 

 

I have grainy black and white movies, smile.png

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"If Hillary is the Grand Mother of Obamacare, it appears Johnny is the father."
For Heavens sake @Valin - spare me that imageohmy.png tongue.png

 

 

LMFAO.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Is Humana's CEO Praising ObamaCare As Rate Shocks Loom?

 

Crony Capitalism: Across the country, health insurers are asking for huge ObamaCare premium increases, blaming new costs imposed by the law. So why is a top industry CEO praising ObamaCare as being great for consumers?

 

Humana CEO Bruce Broussard was on CNBC this week, along with Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini, to discuss the proposed $37 billion merger of the two companies.

 

At one point Broussard talked about how great Obama-Care is for the health care industry. "The regulatory environment protects the consumer and at the same time creates an innovation engine that allows us to compete in the local market," he said.

Find winning stocks with IBD's exclusive stock lists.

Start your 4 week trial to eIBD now!

 

Come again?

 

"A regulated price environment ... that we're required to live within," Broussard repeated, "really brings a very consumer-oriented fashion that is saving society health care costs."

 

Has anyone shown Broussard the rate increases his company is requesting for ObamaCare plans?

 

Humana is pushing double-digit premium increases in every ObamaCare exchange where it plans to operate, with hikes as high as 18.7% in Tennessee, 19% in Illinois, 26% in Kentucky and almost 30% in Texas.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/070915-761017-humana-ceo-says-obamacare-is-driving-innovation-and-cost-cutting.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Clue Fairy Visits Slate

 

Obamacare’s Bill Is Due

And thanks to skyrocketing premiums, you could be the one paying it.
Helaine Olen

July 9 2015

 

Now that the Supreme Court has once again saved Obamacare, can we have an honest talk about it?

 

Let me explain. On one side—you don’t need me to spell out which—the Affordable Care Act was demonized. It was going to bankrupt the health care system; destroy the United States’ reputation for excellent service; steal you away from your doctor; and, by some means never quite explained, lead us straight to communism. Today, subsidized health care premiums and an end to pre-existing condition exclusions; tomorrow, Stalin and FEMA detention camps located in semisecret parts of Texas. You know how it goes.

 

Under this assault, all too many ACA defenders turned into fanboys and fangirls, dismissing any issue raised against the law as inconsequential and exaggerated. And besides, it’s not like legislation to improve any aspect of it would get through our paralyzed, polarized, and now Republican-run Congress anyway.

 

But this strategy might well come back to bite the Democrats. The bill for the health care expansion is coming due, just as the recipients will be heading to the ballot box to vote in the first primaries for the 2016 election. More than a few are likely to be annoyed.

 

(Snip)

 

In the meantime, you shouldn’t need a political consultant to tell you why consumers paying hundreds of dollars—or even more than $1,000 a month—for health insurance they are required to buy and often can’t afford to use might well get angry. Once you name something the Affordable Care Act, people oddly expect the product on offer to be affordable. Who’d have thunk it?

 

Last week Oregon’s insurance commissioner, Laura Cali, announced that the state had approved a 25 percent premium increase for the largest health insurer on the state’s exchanges. The second largest insurer did even better: It received permission to boost its monthly charge to consumers by 33 percent.

 

(Snip)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probe: Bogus enrollees kept getting 'Obamacare'
RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Jul. 15, 2015

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Phony applicants that investigators signed up last year under President Barack Obama's health care law got automatically re-enrolled for 2015. Some were rewarded with even bigger taxpayer subsidies for their insurance premiums, a congressional probe has found.

 

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office says 11 counterfeit characters that its investigators created last year were automatically re-enrolled by HealthCare.gov, even though most had unresolved documentation issues. In Obama's terms, they got to keep the coverage they had.

 

Six of those later were flagged and sent termination notices. But GAO said it was able to get five of them reinstated by calling HealthCare.gov's consumer service center. That seemed to be a weak link in the system.

 

The five bogus beneficiaries who were reinstated even got their monthly subsidies bumped up a bit, although GAO did not ask for it. The case of the sixth fake enrollee who appealed was under review.

 

HealthCare.gov does not appear to be set up to detect fraud, GAO audits and investigations chief Seto Bagdoyan said in prepared testimony for a Senate Finance Committee hearing Thursday. A copy was provided to The Associated Press.

 

(Snip)

 

 

H/T DU SIGH Talk about Clueless!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare plans have 34 percent fewer doctors, hospitals
By Robert King • 7/15/15

 

Obamacare enrollees get to choose from fewer doctors and hospitals than typical health insurance plans, according to a new study.

 

Plans offered on Obamacare insurance exchanges offer 34 percent fewer providers than the average plan offered outside the exchanges, an analysis released Wednesday by the research firm Avalere Health found.

 

The analysis provides new ammunition for GOP attacks that the law doesn't guarantee access to patients' doctors.

 

Specifically, exchange networks offer 42 percent fewer oncology and heart specialists, 32 percent fewer mental health and primary care providers and 24 percent fewer hospitals, Avalere said.

 

"Patients should evaluate a plan's provider network when picking insurance on the exchange," said Elizabeth Carpenter, vice president at Avalere.

 

(Snip)

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ok....Who Is Surprised?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Healthcare.gov Pays $30K to Fake Accounts in GAO Sting

 

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) marketplace approved coverage for fictitious applicants and granted about $30,000 in premium tax credits to those accounts, according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.

 

The GAO first conducted a study because they were asked to “examine controls for application and enrollment for coverage through the federal Marketplace.”

 

To do this, “GAO performed 18 undercover tests, 12 of which focused on phone or online applications,” the report states. “During these tests, the Marketplace approved subsidized coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) for 11 of the 12 fictitious GAO applicants for 2014. The GAO applicants obtained a total of about $30,000 in annual advance premium tax credits, plus eligibility for lower costs due at time of service.”

 

The report was the topic of discussion at the Senate Committee on Finance hearing Thursday to examine Healthcare.gov’s enrollment controls.Scissors-32x32.png

http://freebeacon.com/issues/healthcare-gov-pays-30k-to-fake-accounts-in-gao-sting/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unions vs. Obamacare
July 22 2015

A powerful coalition is forming against one of the more unpopular features of the Affordable Care Act, and even unions are getting into the mix. The New York Times reports on growing opposition to the so-called “Cadillac tax” imposed by Obamacare. This tax, which is slated to go into effect in 2018, puts employers on the hook for individual plans that costs over $10,200 annually or family plans that exceed $27,500. The total amount that an employer pays over those limits for his employees’ plans is taxed at a 40 percent rate.

The tax is well-intentioned. As the NYT reports, it’s aimed at discouraging employers from giving their employees plans that are too generous (and thus help inflate health care spending) and at limiting the tax breaks employers get for providing health care. Wonks on both sides of the political spectrum have long argued that our system of employer-provided health care is seriously dysfunctional, and reducing the tax incentives for it could encourage people to purchase insurance on their own outside the workplace. The hope also appears to be that employers, prompted by the tax to offer less generous health care plans, will spend their money instead on raises for their employees.

These are all very sensible policy aims, but, as so often happens, sensible policy aims aren’t necessarily enough to ensure good outcomes or create widespread support. NYT:

(Snip)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

We Got Trouble! Right Here In Union City!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Taxpayer-Funded Louisiana Co-Op Created Under Obamacare Has Collapsed

 

Just two years after Obamacare’s implementation, a Louisiana nonprofit insurer that received nearly $66 million in taxpayer-funded loans is closing its doors.

 

On Friday, the Louisiana Department of Insurance announced that the state’s consumer operated and oriented plan, or co-op, would be discontinuing its operations at the end of 2015. Louisiana’s is the second co-op created under to Obamacare to close.

 

According to the Department of Insurance, the Louisiana Health Cooperative will not be offering plans to consumers next year, but it will continue its coverage of the 17,000 Louisiana consumers currently receiving health insurance through the co-op.

 

Many of those consumers purchased their plans with the Louisiana Health Cooperative on the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/27/the-taxpayer-funded-louisiana-co-op-created-under-obamacare-has-collapsed/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Situation critical: Obamacare costs set to pummel state budgets

States receiving federal Obamacare expansion cash will soon be hit with a share of the program’s exploding costs.

In most of the states expanding Medicaid, enrollment has dramatically exceeded projections — no problem for states in the short-term, since federal taxpayers are covering all benefit costs.

But each participating state will have to pay 5 percent of its expansion’s benefit costs in 2017. The state share will increase to 10 percent by 2020.

If a 10 percent state share sounds manageable, bear in mind that California’s Obamacare expansion has enrolled 2 million people. Enrollment is around 600,000 per state in Illinois, Michigan and Ohio.

 

With costs exceeding $500 per enrollee per month in many states, even a 5 percent state share will cost millions — or tens of millions — every month.Scissors-32x32.png

http://watchdog.org/231130/obamacare-expansion-state-budgets/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than two-thirds of Obamacare enrollees unsatisfied with coverage: survey

 

Obamacare has offered insurance to millions of people, but they’re unhappy with the coverage they’re getting and are particularly upset about the costs, according to a survey released Monday that suggests the health care law continues to struggle to win over Americans.

Just 30 percent of customers on Obamacare’s exchanges were satisfied with their coverage, the health care research arm of the Deloitte consulting firm said.

 

Only a quarter of Obamacare customers in the survey were confident that they could get care when they needed it, and just 16 percent felt “financially prepared” to handle future health care costs, Deloitte said.

“Those are not high numbers,” said Paul Lambdin, a director for Deloitte’s work on insurance exchanges and retail practices.Scissors-32x32.png

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/3/obamacare-enrollees-less-satisfied-others-survey/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Health Insurance Co-ops Are Losing Money, Federal Audit Finds

ROBERT PEAR

AUG. 14, 2015

 

WASHINGTON — Most federal insurance cooperatives created under the Affordable Care Act are losing money and could have difficulty repaying millions of dollars in federal loans, an internal government audit has found, prompting the Obama administration to step up supervision of the carriers.

 

Daniel R. Levinson, the inspector general at the Department of Health and Human Services, said that most of the insurance co-ops enrolled fewer people than they had predicted, and that 22 of the 23 co-ops lost money last year.

 

Even as overall enrollments for insurance have increased, many of the co-ops are still losing money, a review of 2015 data by federal health officials shows.

 

(Snip)

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

H/T DU

 

Bubzer (156 posts)
1. Insurance should never have been part of the system to begin with!

We need single payer.

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Valin says....Right. because the same people that brought us this train wreck will get it right if they get more power......or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare Co-Ops Looking Like Solyndra?

Aug 19, 2015

 

Last winter, CoOpportunity Health, one of the 23 health care co-ops created by the ACA, went under after it could no longer afford to pay for the care of its customers, who turned out to be sicker than the co-op expected them to be. The co-op was one of the only insurers offering ACA plans in Iowa, and its collapse was a victory for big insurers. In the wake of its demise, it remains uncertain whether the company will be able to pay back federal loans of $147 million.

 

(Snip)

 

The story notes that not all the news is bad: Some of the co-ops are doing better than others, and some quoted by the Times predict that the co-ops’ financial situations will improve over time. Even there, however, the news is mixed, for one way some of these co-ops may become solvent, and thus able to pay back their federal loans, is by raising premiums:

 

(Snip)

 

In the case of CoOpportunity Health, the failed company may be able to use other federal money due to it through the risk corridor program to discharge some of its liabilities. But if it will take big premium hikes to enable some of the co-ops to repay their federal loans, that’s the kind of cure that is worse than the disease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare rates coming out soon

 

Consumers soon will find out whether they will have to pay a lot more for their Obamacare plans next year, with just a few days remaining for a majority of states to finalize them.

 

State insurance officials have until next Tuesday to approve the plans that will be sold in 2016 and submit them to the federal government for a final sign-off. Rates in the majority of states relying on the federal marketplace, found at healthcare.gov, probably won't be available until right before the third year of enrollment begins Nov. 1.

 

But four states — Rhode Island, Oregon, Kentucky and Michigan — already have announced their prices. And rates in the other states running their own marketplaces are expected to trickle out soon as well, likely providing lawmakers returning to Washington after their August recess plenty of Obamacare ammunition to heave at each other.

 

After a significant number of insurers suggested big, double-digit rate increases earlier this summer, Republicans pounced on the proposals as evidence that President Obama's healthcare law is pushing up healthcare costs. But Democrats pointed to the past two years, where premiums in the marketplaces had modest increases on average.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obamacare-rates-coming-out-soon/article/2570586

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obamacare ‘Cadillac tax’ to hit 1 in 4 employers that offer health care benefits

 

Obamacare’s “Cadillac tax” will hit one in four employers that offer health care benefits, a leading industry analyst says in a report being released Tuesday, socking companies with a massive levy that Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill say is unfair to those who have negotiated high-quality plans as part of their jobs.

The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that 26 percent of companies will be affected by the tax when it takes effect in 2018 and 42 percent of employers will be paying the levy a decade later, signaling just how quickly health care costs are expected to rise — and how valuable the Cadillac plans are.

Kaiser said some employers probably will cut back on the scope of their plans to duck the tax, resulting in coverage with higher deductibles or networks with fewer doctors.

“For the most part, these changes will result in employees paying for a greater share of their health care out-of-pocket,” the study authors wrote.Scissors-32x32.png

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/25/obamacare-cadillac-tax-to-hit-1-in-4-employers-tha/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two Things to Remember About Health Care Policy

Dan Hanson August 25, 2015 62 COMMENTS

 

When trying to formulate a logical, humane health care system, the key is to start from this fundamental understanding: In our wealthy Western countries, we’re not going to let people die in the streets because they can’t afford readily available health care treatments.

 

Since everyone knows we aren’t going to turn people away from emergency rooms, a completely free market won’t work. The free rider problem is insurmountable. People can and will choose not to participate in the market until they become sick, and they will then rely on the good will of society to care for them. So the government will be involved in the health care delivery system in some way. Given the free rider problem, it should do so realistically: It should help people at the bottom while keeping government distortion of the market to a minimum. Scissors-32x32.png

https://ricochet.com/an-important-thing-to-remember-about-health-care-policy/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

universal, single-payer, catastrophic coverage only insurance.hat insurance should be very limited in scope to minimize the third-party payer problem.

 

In a universal catastrophic insurance system, the government would pick up your health care costs, but only if your health care problems reached a threshold such that they were a very significant hardship.

 

(Snip)

 

To make this palatable to progressives, you can raise the deductible in tandem with income. So a person who makes $20,000 a year might only have to pay for health care until the bills hit $2,000 in a year; a person making $200,000 might be responsible for the first $20,000......(Snip)

 

 

Who can spot the problems with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0